Because other teams think he's good. Look, Finley sucks. But watch how teams play him, especially in the red zone.... it's like he's Gronkowski x2. They double team him and sometimes triple. It makes no sense, because he's probably going to A) not get open anyway and B) drop the ball if he does. But they do it.. game in and game out.

That's really the biggest reason we've been such an effective red zone team the last three years. It certainly isn't our running game. We line Finley up, pretend he's going to do something and throw it to a one-on-one covered Nelson or James Jones or Rodgers runs it in while everyone has their backs turned chasing our crappy TE.

I definitely think Finley is gone after this year but realistically he's worth the $8 mil this year, as we have no backup plan in place right now and for whatever reason teams gameplan against him.

Being a super conservative team and then spending $8 million on a lousy tight end is a great idea.

$8 for one year when we have plenty of cap room for a tight end we can't replace this year and who is critical to how our offense operates. Yeah, terrible idea.

Finley isn't great. He's also not lousy and he does draw constant attention from the defense which opens up a lot for our receivers. When the Packers lost Jennings, they had no choice but to keep Finley for another year and his agent knew it. We asked for a pay cut, the agent said nah and we couldn't drop him.

As "lousy" as you guys think Finley is, someone would have paid him big bucks in a second.

$8 for one year when we have plenty of cap room for a tight end we can't replace this year and who is critical to how our offense operates. Yeah, terrible idea.

Finley isn't great. He's also not lousy and he does draw constant attention from the defense which opens up a lot for our receivers. When the Packers lost Jennings, they had no choice but to keep Finley for another year and his agent knew it. We asked for a pay cut, the agent said nah and we couldn't drop him.

As "lousy" as you guys think Finley is, someone would have paid him big bucks in a second.

Martellus Bennett is considerably better, and just got $5 million a year.

Martellus Bennett is considerably better, and just got $5 million a year.

I would agree Bennett is better as a complete tight end. Considerably, not really.

However, how good and how much Bennett is getting paid isn't a valid argument. Finley at $8 mil for this year was the best/only option the Packers had. They weren't going to sign Bennett. They tried to get Finley for cheaper.

No one is arguing Finley isn't overpaid and he isn't all that great. But the Packers needed him for this year, without question and possibly enough that they would have dropped from the top tier of teams without him. He's very valuable to that offense.

Well I don't necessarily think that keeping Finley was a terrible move, they definitely could have taken advantage of that money in other ways.

They could have front loaded the **** out of Rodgers' and/or Matthews' new deals to give them more cap flexibility in the future or used it to give Raji, who they could be in danger of losing because of those other two, a new contract.

League's best decoy. Worth 8 mil? Sure, because it's not like we're gonna go out and get SJax and IMPROVE our offense with actual production.

Be disheartened not, my dear friend, all running backs succumb to the curse of time. Even the great LT, whom many thought would be the most likely to avoid it... fell swiftly to the abyss when he ended up on a new team. SJax may seem like a missed opportunity but time will tell the true tale of missing out on a 30 year old back (he's 29 now but his bday is July) with 2800 career touches.

I've always enjoyed SJax, but his best days are done. The draft offers better and cheaper options with far more longevity.

So....Jon Scott, a backup OT, is the move that set you over? Seems a little much. I realize you have problems with some other moves; I personally didn't like the Bushrod deal either, nor the Jeffery pick, but you're gonna look silly if Bushrod's 2012 turns out to have been an anomaly or if McClellin improves as a pass rusher (as I, personally, fully expect).

The thing with Emery, is that when he explains his logic, it's hard for me to question his thought process. He refers to PFF and other outside scouting services as tools he trusts, but he trusts his staff and his own eye first and foremost. He went into some pretty good detail explaining his draft picks and free agent signings. His whole mantra seems to be surrounding his franchise QB with playmakers, improving the OL in its current state without going overboard with $$$, and adding pass rushers and defensive backs on defense. He went into detail explaining his decision not to address the OL in last year's draft and it was just insanely....logical....to me. If he doesn't know how to build a team, he does a good job of hiding it during his press conferences.

But OTOH, I'm not going to act like he hasn't made some questionable moves. Like I said, I'm mostly with you on Bushrod. I don't put as much weight into readily available PFF numbers as you do, but they did pay far too much. The Forte deal was more than I would have paid for any RB, and in hindsight, even though the deal looked like good market value, year 1 was a huge disappointment. I'm still not sure how a creep like Trestman was able to impress him throughout the interview process, and my instinct is to dislike the move, but I have no way of knowing for sure until the season starts. When I look at the roster in place, I don't see why they can't win a Super Bowl this season. So while I'm not ecstatic, I don't see any reason to be quite as.....dramatic......as you're being. Yet.

Edit: Oh, and as for the comments about Pioli - come on, you know that's dumb. Pioli's problem was an insanely stupid commitment to terrible QB's. They drafted pretty well while Emery was there. Dimitroff is from the same tree and Emery, himself, has credited Dimitroff as a GM whose methods he admires. I would hardly say he's been been in three car wrecks.

Be disheartened not, my dear friend, all running backs succumb to the curse of time. Even the great LT, whom many thought would be the most likely to avoid it... fell swiftly to the abyss when he ended up on a new team. SJax may seem like a missed opportunity but time will tell the true tale of missing out on a 30 year old back (he's 29 now but his bday is July) with 2800 career touches.

I've always enjoyed SJax, but his best days are done. The draft offers better and cheaper options with far more longevity.

We don't have to sacrifice a pick to pick up Jackson. It's not like we have crazy depth at RB. A bunch of injury history. More bodies the etter and especially a vet like Jackson. But hey, that's no longer an option. But it made so much sense!